Cleared Franklin officials to sue councilors for defamation

Sunday

May 27, 2007 at 12:01 AMMay 27, 2007 at 6:43 AM

Michael Morton/Daily News staff

"I think it's unprofessional the way the council acted," board member James Chilson Sr. said Friday, referring to a televised meeting in which several councilors criticized him and Chairman Tony Padula.

Both men now plan to file defamation suits against councilors Joseph McGann, Scott Mason, Judith Pond Pfeffer and Chairman Christopher Feeley, they said.

"To have my integrity questioned like that, I think it does matter," Padula said.

Responding to the potential lawsuits, Pond Pfeffer said, "I think they should take their best shot."

The other three councilors could either not be reached or declined to comment on the possible litigation.

The dispute has its origins in a special permit the pair voted for that required John Marini, the developer of Franklin Center Commons, to construct his buildings in a specific order. Later, when Marini came back to change the order, Chilson helped block his request, and the board's decision drew fire from several of the councilors and other town officials.

The frustration boiled over at a February council meeting, when McGann called Padula and Chilson "obstructionist" and Padula replied that the councilor was still upset that a Planning Board decision had gone against his construction business.

Later, ethical questions over separate matters pertaining to Padula and Chilson were brought up at the council. Mason, Pond Pfeffer and Feeley joined McGann in referring the two men to the state Ethics Commission.

In Padula's case, the four councilors sent the commission a town-drafted list of Planning Board decisions in which the chairman allegedly failed to recuse himself despite the proximity of his in-laws' property. Padula has questioned the accuracy of the list and has said any mistakes he may have made were inadvertent.

The complaint against Chilson centered around a lawsuit he filed against the town and a developer, which he lost and then appealed. In her decision, Superior Court Justice Judith Fabricant found that the Planning Board member had written a letter to the town planner opposing development of land adjacent to his and had threatened to block all projects there unless the property was sold to him below market rate.

Chilson has denied making any threats, and a ruling on his appeal is pending.

During Monday's Planning Board meeting, Padula announced that the Ethics Commission had cleared him. Later, in the parking lot, Chilson produced a letter showing that the commission had found no reason to pursue the matter. As a matter of policy, the commission neither confirms nor denies its investigations.

"I wasn't surprised," Padula said of the commission's decision.

Chilson agreed.

"I knew I didn't do anything wrong," he said.

Speaking about the commission's decision, rather than the pending lawsuits, the councilors expressed no regrets about their decision.

"The state ruled on it the way they saw it," McGann said. "(But) I said what I believed from my heart. I'll always keep the same opinion."

McGann questioned how an elected official could represent the town while suing it.

"I find it mind-boggling," he said.

Feeley also said he was surprised at the rulings.

"I'm unclear what an ethics violation is at this point if that's not," he said.

Mason said he accepted the commission's decision.

"It's time to move on," he said, adding that it was the duty of officeholders to report suspected misconduct.

After the Planning Board turned down Marini's request, the council had discussed whether the board's special permit authority should be removed. While those talks were halted to focus on the budget and a Proposition 21/2 tax override, they may be revisited, Feeley said. So far, such a discussion has not been put on the agenda, and board members have defended the current system.

Moving forward, the councilors said they harbor no ill will toward Padula and Chilson and hope their two groups can work together.

"It's business as usual as far as I'm concerned," Feeley said.

Chilson also thought the two sides could still cooperate.

"It's all for the town," he said. "It's the issue in front of you."

The councilors and Chilson are up for re-election in the fall. In calling attention to the conduct of Chilson and Padula, McGann had said he was staking his political reputation on whether the move was justified.

Asked if the ethics complaints would impact the outcome of the vote, he replied, "Time will tell. Time will tell."